Back to Volume Thirteen Contents

Denial of Denial: Color-Blind Racism and Academic

Silencing in France
Iseult Mc Nulty

Abstract
In February 2021, the French minister of higher education, Frédérique Vidal,
publicly condemned postcolonial, decolonial, intersectionality, gender, and racial
studies. Contending that a radical faction of the Left is wreaking havoc on
universities and dividing French society, she emphasized her disagreement with
studies relating to race, arguing that the concept is biologically unsound—
regardless of its material or social reality. The minister suggested that an
investigation be launched to examine the radical Left’s dissemination of divisive
ideologies that are allegedly corroding academia as well as French society and
Republican values.
This article harnesses Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s theorization of color-blind
racism through the lens of French Republicanism, as well as postcolonial and
decolonial theory, in order to unpack the epistemological violence at play in this
controversy. Why is scholarship on race framed as a threat to core Republican
values? What does this mean for academic freedom?

In February 2021, the French minister of higher education, Frédérique

Vidal, suggested that an investigation be launched into the corrosion of
academic institutions that she termed as belonging to the “radical Left”
(Delaporte 2021). The word she used was “Islamo-leftism”—an elusive
umbrella term that accuses leftists who support Palestinians of complicity
with Islamist terrorism (Faure 2020). Associating and critiquing
postcolonial, decolonial, intersectional, gender, and racial studies, her

Copyright American Association of University Professors, 2022

AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom 2
Volume Thirteen

investigation would examine the ways “rampant leftism” pushes a

politically divisive agenda that threatens les valeurs de la République, or
French Republican values (Fassin 2021). This article will focus on her
specific line of argumentation, which leads her to contend that research
relating to colonialism and race only serves to “fracture and divide,”
making her assault on academia one undeniably bound up in race
(Plowright 2021).
Following the death of George Floyd in May 2020 in the United States,
French antiracist activists sought to bring the conversation on institutional
racism into the French context. Various government officials, including
the current president, Emmanuel Macron, rejected any claims that
structural, institutional, or systemic racism is relevant in the French
context (France Inter 2021). Resistance to postcolonial and decolonial
ideas is neither new nor specific to France. However, I argue that given
the unique aspects of the French Republic’s approach to race, this
particular controversy has taken on an inherently French quality.
Legally, the French Republic does not recognize race, viewing the
concept as biologically and scientifically unsound. However, many
theorists point out that while any biological understanding of race should
be rejected, it does have a social and ontological reality and should be
regarded “as an organizational principle of the social world” (Hamilton
2020, 2). In the French context, “acknowledging race or using racial
categories [is considered to be] incompatible with fighting racism”
(Fleming 2017, 6). Whatever its intent, this refusal to recognize race as a
social fact has cultivated a denial of the deleterious and violent expression
of the reality of race: racism. The salience of racism in French society
remains hidden behind the state’s color-blind rhetoric (Browne 2009).
Color-blindness is simply a new adaptation of racism, one where racism
exists “without racists” (Bonilla-Silva 2016, 6).
This essay harnesses academic research on race and racism in France
in order to determine why scholarship on race is framed as a threat to core
Republican values and what this means for academic freedom.
I use Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s work to demonstrate how a racially
color-blind ideology has become a French Republican article of faith,
bordering on an existential credo. I will apply postcolonial and decolonial
3 Denial of Denial
Iseult Mc Nulty

theory to suggest that this is precisely why academic research on race has
come under fire from government officials, compromising the tenets of
academic freedom.

Color-Blindness as a French Republican Doctrine

The conceptual framework Bonilla-Silva builds to analyze color-blind
discourse proves extremely informative for a French context. He contends
that in the aftermath of the civil rights movement, with the end of legal
and explicit white supremacy, the United States underwent an ideological
shift from formal, overt racism to covert, color-blind racism. The situation
for racial minorities in the United States may not be as dire now as it was
then, but color-blind ideology is nevertheless an enduring form of racism
withstood by “practices . . . that are more sophisticated and subtle than
those typical of the Jim Crow era,” while being just “as effective as the old
ones in maintaining the racial status quo” (Bonilla-Silva 2006, 25).
Although Bonilla-Silva’s work concentrates on a US context, Stuart Hall’s
(1997) conception of race as a “floating signifier” reminds us of the
plasticity of race and the adaptable nature of racism. Race has ebbed and
flowed through time and space, and has the capacity to change and
reconfigure itself as it moves (Wolfe 2016). Carefully applying Bonilla-
Silva’s theoretical framework to a French context while being mindful of
France’s Republican specificities, this article eschews the common
conception that racism in the United States and in France are
incomparable.
Color-blindness is a new adaptation of racism that relies on the denial
and depoliticization of racial issues (Lê Espiritu and Puar 2015). The view
that French society is postracial and that racism is essentially over fuels
the refusal to acknowledge the structural nature of racism, which
perpetuates the unequal racial status quo and “muddies the waters of
mainstream conversations and understandings of race” (Reynolds 2019,
8). This use of color-blindness does not seek to make society more
equitable but only “functions to make white privilege invisible” (Browne
2009, 78). “We must be clear that ‘color-blind’ rhetoric—whether from the
French state itself or from individual academics—reinforces white
supremacy” (Fleming 2020, 2). Scholars and activists whose work centers
AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom 4
Volume Thirteen

race are seen as fueling racial animus, stripping away the “historical basis,
severity and power” of racism as a structure (Song 2014, 107).
The French method of combatting racism, so far, has been one of
“racial avoidance” (Fleming 2017, 6). Through the categorical rejection of
the concept of race, France firmly upholds its color-blind approach
(Keaton 2010). French Republicanism stresses the importance of equality
but simultaneously seems to deny the state’s role in perpetuating
inequalities, making it nearly impossible to provide critical solutions
(Khanna 2011). Despite having been heavily criticized by academics who
specialize in the study of race, Republicanism has become so naturalized
(and unconditionally and uncritically taken for granted) that the
Republican rhetoric of color-blindness is used as a shield against any
criticism of the state (Kisukidi et al. 2021). One of the most important
limits of the French approach is that it focuses on individual
manifestations of racism while ignoring the fact that “the state is a key
actor in the process of racialization” (Garner 2017, 52). The conditions of
French citizenship are that one can only be Republican, or an individual
member of the Republic, which is why any reference to “race” or
“ethnicity” has been removed from the Constitution and national
censuses (Kervran 2020). By “making invisible the making of people
invisible,” the French state has distanced itself from racism while ignoring
its own role in creating and perpetuating it (Valluvan 2016, 2244).
Since “colonial atrocities are understood as the negation of French
Republican ideals rather than ones that developed with them,” it has
become difficult to study how state-enforced systemic racial
discrimination undermines the very foundations of Republican principles
(Khanna 2011, 197). French and Francophone postcolonial and decolonial
scholars have produced a significant body of research pointing to the
limits of Republican color-blindness. These authors seek to develop their
theories in the French context, to explore the impact of colonialism on
metropolitan France and to deconstruct contemporary inequalities by
unpacking their colonial roots (Sékongo and Yéo 2007). In other words,
they flip studies of colonialism on their head by exploring the
consequences for the colonial power rather than for the formerly
colonized. The collective aphasia of the Republic’s capacity to brutalize,
5 Denial of Denial
Iseult Mc Nulty

exclude, and discriminate is extremely important for the formation of a

national myth and to sustain the illusion that the French state is immune
to racism (Stoler 2011).

Epistemological Violence
Bonilla-Silva’s map of color-blind racism demonstrates how, in addition
to socioeconomic and political exploitation, a large part of the
establishment of European domination over the rest of the (colonized)
world was epistemological (Bonilla-Silva 2006). The Enlightenment-era’s
thirst for knowledge and pursuit of truth is often credited with resulting
in the construction of liberal philosophies—such as French
Republicanism—that have since served as the foundation for
contemporary democracies (Tuhiwai Smith 2012). Racism as a system was
developed alongside the emergence of modern nation-states, including
the contemporary French Republic (Goldberg 2002). While critical race
theory explores and reflects upon the roots of the world order inherited
from Enlightenment philosophy, postcolonial and decolonial authors
seek to uncover how the legacies of chattel enslavement and colonization
can explain modern socioeconomic and political inequalities (Maldonado-
Torres 2016). The concepts of modernity and rationality are products of
Enlightenment thinking that are fundamentally intertwined with the
history of imperial colonization, racial formation, and the development of
global white supremacy (Omi and Winant 2014). It is hence argued that
since race is the cornerstone of “modernity,” the belief in Western, and
white, superiority is the foundation of Western epistemology (Quijano
2000). This belief was developed to justify the subjugation, enslavement,
and colonization of nonwhite peoples. Modern manifestations of race
(and correspondingly, of racism) remain rooted in the same belief in white
superiority, although this sentiment is much more covert than it was in
past centuries (Fleming 2017).
Edward Said (1978, 205) refers to the sense of entitlement embedded
in the Enlightenment mindset as a “positional superiority” that almost
precedes imperial and colonial violence. This belief in inherent Western
superiority enabled the level of violence that went hand in hand with
colonial projects. “The Enlightenment provided the spirit, the impetus,
AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom 6
Volume Thirteen

the confidence, and the political and economic structures that facilitated
the search for new knowledges” (Tuhiwai Smith 2012, 61). If we seek to
excavate the ways structures of oppression are intellectually bolstered, it
is interesting to examine, in addition to the classification and hierarchies
imposed on bodies (racism), the ways coloniality is embedded in the
production of knowledge. A pillar of decolonial thought is the aim to
challenge the West’s “epistemological dominance,” or the idea that
Europe is the center, the core, and the rest of the world is the periphery of
what is and should be considered of value (Bhambra 2014, 120).
Decolonial studies propose a new “geopolitics of knowledge” that seek to
include and center “the Other” and “Other” epistemologies in order to
demystify “the West’s view of itself as the center of legitimate knowledge,
the arbiter of what counts as knowledge and the source of ‘civilized’
knowledge” (Tuhiwai Smith 2012, 66). Historically, colonialism and its
associated belief systems played a highly influential role in the decimation
of the knowledge of the colonized. This essay argues not only that this
epistemological power dynamic continues to permeate our ways of
knowing but also that it is the very reason why research seeking to unpack
the legacies of colonial structures (that is, the persistence of racism) is
under attack (Harawi 2020). Counternarratives and knowledge produced
from the periphery are deemed illegitimate and even dangerous. Indeed,
what counts as fact remains under the authority of those who “[shape] the
parameters of legitimate knowledge,” which ultimately serves to
undermine epistemologies from the margins (Aked 2020, 117).
Addressing Western epistemological dominance, Gayatri Spivak
(1999, 59) asks, “Who will listen [to Third World authors]?” The inability
of non-Western, nonwhite authors, or authors who produce knowledge
from the peripheries to be taken seriously is inherently the result of
epistemological violence, or the embodiment of an ongoing coloniality of
mind (Wa Thiong’o 1992). Western-centric hierarchies of knowledge are
such that the knowledge produced by marginalized authors (which may
account for their lived experience) is itself marginalized and
delegitimized (Tuhiwai Smith 2012). Furthermore, there is evidence that
suggests that academics of color are “actively punished . . . when [their
work] discomfits the status quo,” and the controversy at hand is arguably
7 Denial of Denial
Iseult Mc Nulty

a concrete example of this (Lê Espiritu and Puar 2015, 66). Indeed,
“minority representatives or experts are very seldom heard in a credible,
authoritative way” (Van Dijk 2013, 271), and, moreover, “certain bodies
[are constructed] as threatening, dangerous, and uncivil,” an accusation
more likely to be “thrown at bodies of color, of immigrants, of queers” (Lê
Espiritu and Puar 2015, 64–65). Academic freedom is thus not granted
equally to everyone: “Suppression of academic freedom is especially
pronounced for socially defined black faculty who critically examine
white supremacy,” which ultimately serves to ensure that the racial status
quo remains unchallenged (Reynolds 2020, 388). Not only do
governments fail to protect minority academics but the assault on critical
thinking by those very governments exacerbates racialized and gendered
threats on those scholars (Harawi 2020). For instance, the Islamophobic
language used by the French minister and state in their McCarthyistic
attack on critical thought marginalizes Muslim students and academics
and further reinforces Islamophobic racism in France (ibid., see also
Kisukidi et al. 2021).

Conclusion
To contextualize this body of theory within Vidal’s statement, critical
authors working to decolonize academia, and eventually society more
broadly, are faced with a “concurrent rise of colonial nostalgia and white
supremacy among some academics” (Sultana 2018, 228). Their academic
freedom to research race, coloniality, intersectionality, and social justice is
under assault by fellow academics as well as by the state, precisely
because their research may result in the dissemination of knowledge that
is critical of the state and that may compromise the dominant class’s
hegemony. The idea that young people from marginalized sections of
French society may be “seduced” by these decolonial ideas poses a real
threat to the dominant white bourgeoisie’s position of power (Kisukidi et
al. 2021). It is in the interest of “those who benefit from injustices and
inequalities” to repress these ideas (Sultana 2018, 231). The French state’s
witch hunt against these schools of thought is unsurprising since
“systemic and institutional racism, sexism, and other forms of
discrimination are often maintained through acts of silencing” (Sultana
AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom 8
Volume Thirteen

2018, 250). The ruling factions of French society are protecting their
interests by perpetuating epistemological violence, discrediting and
delegitimizing counternarratives that stem from the peripheries and that
seek to rethink our world order.
The idea that academia is under such a threat that it requires
governmental intervention is a mischaracterization of the issue: real
problems (that is, racism) are not addressed, and nonproblems (that is, the
supposed corruption of French Republican values by academia) are
overaddressed (Harawi 2020). The color-blind, Republican discursive
matrix deployed by the French state serves as a rebuttal against discourses
critical of the state’s approach to race. Due to the embeddedness of color-
blindness within Republicanism, the denunciation of racism is seen as an
attack on France itself. This sophism echoes Teun Van Dijk’s (2013)
argument that within racism denial the accusation of racism is so
intolerable that the accuser becomes the true racist. This analysis confirms
that “denials of racism are not tropes existing in a vacuum. . . . They also
serve a very specific sociopolitical function: they challenge the very
legitimacy of antiracist analysis” (Zia-Ebrahami 2020, 317).
Furthermore, the very nature of epistemological dominance entails
the impossibility that the hegemonic class or dominant group will truly
reckon with counterhegemonic narratives due to its inherent
delegitimization of them (Tuhiwai Smith 2012). This fascinating
narcissism has fueled the Republican refusal to hear or acknowledge
scholarship that criticizes it. The targeted academic fields aim to address
(and redress) structures of domination. Their work therefore defends,
rather than undermines, universalist and Republican values (Fassin and
Ibos 2021). Scholarship on race seeks to challenge and change the racial
status quo for the better, so that Republican values of liberté, égalité, and
fraternité are truly upheld. This article therefore suggests that indeed,
scholarship on race is a threat to Republican values, as they are deployed
today.
To open up the discussion, it is useful to contextualize this controversy
within a broader, more global phenomenon. France is not alone in its
witch hunt against critical thought. The threat currently posed by the
French state to academia seeking to challenge ongoing coloniality can be
9 Denial of Denial
Iseult Mc Nulty

compared to the North American, British, Israeli, Turkish, or Brazilian

contexts (Lang 2020; Carter 2021; Sultana 2018; Landy et al. 2020; Fassin
and Ibos 2021). Counterhegemonic narratives that go against the state are
repressed and silenced around the globe (Harawi 2020). Racism is a
worldwide issue, as are the efforts to maintain the racial status quo. With
Evyn Lê Espiritu and Jasbir Puar (2015, 67), I argue that “the convergence
of these three issues—academic freedom, the erosion of faculty
governance, and political work on [marginalized or racialized groups] . .
. is not coincidental but constitutive and intrinsic.”
Through this article I hope to contribute not only to the literature
addressing color-blind racism in the French Republic but also to the body
of work developing around the world on epistemological erasure as
racism, as authoritarian silencing of academia becomes more widespread.
The “will to divide” (Vidal’s term) is deployed not by counterhegemonic
discourses seeking to reinstate our shared humanity and truly uphold
humane values of equality but rather by the powerful who benefit from
societal division. Racialized voices and counternarratives should be
centered and amplified (not suppressed) in academia, specifically in its
work on race. However, these issues do not end at university gates: our
world becomes richer when we include, value, and respect all forms of
knowledge production and dissemination.

Iseult Mc Nulty is a Franco-Irish recent graduate of the MPhil in Race, Ethnicity,

and Conflict program at Trinity College Dublin. This article is an edited excerpt
from her thesis. Her interests lie in the dissemination of knowledge that challenges
structures of domination, oppression, and injustice. She is currently working as
the speechwriter for the president of the General Assembly at United Nations
headquarters in New York.

References
Aked, Hilary. 2020. “Whose University? Academic Freedom,
Neoliberalism and the Rise of ‘Israel Studies.’" In Enforcing
Silence: Academic Freedom, Palestine and the Criticism of Israel,
AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom 10
Volume Thirteen

edited by David Landy, Ronit Lentin, and Conor McCarthy, 114–

71. London: Zed.

Bhambra, Gurminder Kaur. 2014. “Postcolonial and Decolonial

Dialogues.” Postcolonial Studies 17, no. 2: 115–21.

Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo. 2006. Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism

and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in the United States. Oxford,
UK: Rowman and Littlefield.

Browne, Anthony. 2009. “Denying Race in the American and French

Context.” Wadabagei: A Journal of the Caribbean and Its Diaspora
12(1): 73–91.

Carter, Ashleigh. 2021. “Florida Bans Critical Race Theory from

Schools.” NowThis News, November 6, 2021.

Delaporte, Lucie. 2021. “Emmanuel Macron’s Government Is Mounting a

Witch Hunt against ‘Islamo-Leftism’ in France’s Universities.”
Jacobinmag, February 20, 2021.
https://jacobinmag.com/2021/02/france-macron-vidal-islamo-
leftism-universities.

Fassin, Didier. 2021. “Are ‘Woke’ Academics a Threat to the French

Republic? Ask Macron's Ministers.” Guardian, March 12, 2021.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/12/acade
mics-french-republic-macron-islamo-leftism.

Fassin, Eric, and Caroline Ibos. 2021. “Feu (sur) les libertés académiques:
L’anti-intellectualisme, menace globale?” Mediapart, July 16, 2021.
https://blogs.mediapart.fr/la-savante-et-le-
politique/blog/160721/feu-sur-les-libertes-academiques-l-anti-
intellectualisme-menace-globale.

Faure, Valentine. 2020. “‘Islamo-gauchisme’: Histoire tortueuse d’une

expression devenue invective.” Le Monde, December 11, 2020.
11 Denial of Denial
Iseult Mc Nulty

Fleming, Crystal Marie. 2017. Resurrecting Slavery: Racial Legacies and

White Supremacy in France. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Fleming, Crystal Marie. 2020. “How to Be Less Stupid about Race in

France.” H-France Salon 12(1, #6): 1–3.

France Inter. 2021. “Emmanuel Macron: ‘La République n’effacera

aucune trace’ et ‘elle ne déboulonnera pas de statues.’” June 14,
2021.

Garner, Steve. 2017. Racisms: An Introduction. London: Sage.

Goldberg, David. 2002. The Racial State, vol. 8. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Hall, Stuart. 1997. “Race: The Floating Signifier.” Produced and directed
by Sut Jhalley. Video. Northampton, MA: Media Education
Foundation.

Hamilton, Amber. 2020. “A Genealogy of Critical Race and Digital

Studies: Past, Present, and Future.” Sociology of Race and Ethnicity
00(0): 1–10.

Harawi, Yara. 2020. “The Academic Boycott and Beyond: Towards an

Epistemological Strategy of Liberation and Decolonization.” In
Enforcing Silence: Academic Freedom, Palestine and the Criticism of
Israel, edited by David Landy, Ronit Lentin, and Conor
McCarthy, 410–58. London: Zed.

Keaton, Trica. 2010. “The Politics of Race-Blindness: (Anti)Blackness and

Category-Blindness in Contemporary France.” Du Bois Review:
Social Science Research on Race 7, no. 1: 103–31.

Kervran, Perrine. 2020. “L’universalisme en question: Politique et race en

France, un mariage dangereux.” France Culture, October 8, 2020.
https://www.franceculture.fr/emissions/lsd-la-serie-
AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom 12
Volume Thirteen

documentaire/politique-et-race-en-france-un-mariage-dangereux-
44-luniversalisme-en-question.

Khanna, Ranjana. 2011. “Racial France, or the Melancholic Alterity of

Postcolonial Studies.” Public Culture 23, no. 1: 191–99.

Kisukidi, Nadia Yala, Muriam Haleh Davis, Nadia Marzouki, Didier

Fassin, and Françoise Vergès. Zoom webinar, March 2, 2021.
“Right Hook: The Attack on Critical Thought in France.”
https://uchri.org/events/right-hook-the-attack-on-critical-
thought-in-france/.

Landy, David, Ronit Lentin, and Conor McCarthy, eds. 2020. Enforcing
Silence: Academic Freedom, Palestine and the Criticism of Israel.
London: Zed.

Lang, Cady. 2020. “What Is Critical Race Theory?” Time, September 29,
2020.

Lê Espiritu, Evyn, and Jasbir Puar. 2015. “Civility, Academic Freedom,

and the Project of Decolonization: A Conversation with Steven
Salaita.” Qui Parle: Critical Humanities and Social Sciences 24, no. 1:
63–88.

Lentin, Alana. 2019. “Post-racialisme, déni du racisme et crise de la

blanchité.” SociologieS: 1–22.
https://doi.org/10.4000/sociologies.10990.

Maldonado-Torres, Nelson. 2016. “Outline of Ten Theses on Coloniality

and Decoloniality.” Foundation Frantz Fanon.
http://frantzfanonfoundation-
fondationfrantzfanon.com/article2360.html.

Omi, Michael, and Howard Winant. 2014. Racial Formation in the United
States. New York: Routledge.
13 Denial of Denial
Iseult Mc Nulty

Plowright, Adam. 2021. “French Minister Warns of ‘Islamo-leftism’ in

Universities.” Al-Jazeera, February 18, 2021.

Quijano, Aníbal. 2000. “Coloniality of Power, Eurocentrism and Latin

America.” Nepantla: Views from the South 1, no. 3: 533–80.

Reynolds, John. 2020. “Colonial Apologism and the Politics of Academic

Freedom.” In Enforcing Silence: Academic Freedom, Palestine and the
Criticism of Israel, edited by David Landy, Ronit Lentin and Conor
McCarthy, 351–407. London: Zed.

Reynolds, Kim. 2019. “Red, White and Blue, for Who? A Critical
Discourse Analysis of Mainstream Media Coverage of Colin
Kaepernick and Take a Knee.” Working Paper Series.
Media@LSE.

Said, Edward. 1978. Orientalism: Western Concepts of the Orient. New

York: Pantheon.

Sékongo, Kafalo, and Lacina Yéo. 2007. “À propos de l’actualité du

discours sur le colonialisme d’Aimé Césaire ou le fondement du
discours postcolonial à l’ère de la mondialisation.” Eurostudia 3,
no. 2.

Song, Miri. 2014. “Challenging a Culture of Racial Equivalence.” British

Journal of Sociology 65, no. 1: 107–29.

Spivak, Gayatri. 1990. The Post-colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies,

Dialogues. London: Routledge.

Stoler, Ann Laura. 2011. “Colonial Aphasia: Race and Disabled Histories
in France.” Public Culture 23, no. 1: 121–56.

Sultana, Farhana. 2018. “The False Equivalence of Academic Freedom

and Free Speech.” ACME: An International Journal for Critical
Geographies 17, no. 2: 228–57.
AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom 14
Volume Thirteen

Tuhiwai Smith, Linda. 2012. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and

Indigenous Peoples. London: Zed.

Valluvan, Sivamohan. 2016. “What Is ‘Post-race’ and What Does It

Reveal about Contemporary Racisms?” Ethnic and Racial Studies
39, no. 13: 2241–51.

Van Dijk, Teun. 2013. “Discourse and the Denial of Racism.” In Critical
Discourse Analysis, edited by Ruth Wodak, 257–90. London: Sage.

Wa Thiong'o, Ngugi. 1992. Decolonising the Mind: The Politics of Language

in African Literature. Nairobi: East African Publishers.

Wolfe, Patrick. 2016. Traces of History: Elementary Structures of Race. New

York: Verso.

Zia-Ebrahimi, Reza. 2020. “The French Origins of ‘Islamophobia

Denial.’” Patterns of Prejudice 54, no. 4.